Are we all sheep?

[the barnacle]

off topic but wondered if Junior was ok i used to enjoy his observations and stories and havnt seen him on here for some time?

[Athy]

 

Well it seems as if members were talked about, could it have been about the way they acted on the forum etc or elsewhere I wonder.

 

 

When a group of friends meets, it is scarcely unusual for them to talk about other people whom they know.

[Naughty Cal]

When a group of friends meets, it is scarcely unusual for them to talk about other people whom they know.

Blimey someone who is talking some sense

[tree monkey]

 

Well it seems as if members were talked about, could it have been about the way they acted on the forum etc or elsewhere I wonder.

 

My mind is wondering if there was a breach of privacy , wondering.

Stop talking bloody nonsense and grow up

When a group of friends meets, it is scarcely unusual for them to talk about other people whom they know.

Thank you, someone asked for support from friends, as it happens it was via Facebook, it could have easily been over a pint

[nicknorman]

off topic but wondered if Junior was ok i used to enjoy his observations and stories and havnt seen him on here for some time?

No he left in disgust some time ago. He is to be found on the other channel.

[RLWP]

 

Interesting, it seem my spy was on the mark; a partial admission because in my opinion moderation was being talked about and you weren't happy about being a Mod by proxy. Would it have been OK if you had been a Mod?

 

I have turned down being a mod several times

 

Richard

[Geo]

When a group of friends meets, it is scarcely unusual for them to talk about other people whom they know.

 

It depends on where the information being talked about came from

 

 

Stop talking bloody nonsense and grow up

 

Thank you, someone asked for support from friends, as it happens it was via Facebook, it could have easily been over a pint

 

I grew up a very long time a go and learnt the need for confidentiality about information that enters my grey cell about people in business hours and other hours. Just because you know something about someone does not mean you are free to discuss it with all and sundry.

 

Oh just realised you are younger than my eldest.

 

I have turned down being a mod several times

 

Richard

 

So is it possible that the group considered you one of them, the Mods/Admin that is?

Edited October 18, 2016 by Geo

[the barnacle]

No he left in disgust some time ago. He is to be found on the other channel.

 

Thats a shame to the forums loss - followed him since he first joined - enjoyed all his posts, i had offered to help him if he ever needed it on the wolverhampton locks, - what other channel or isnt it allowed to be mentioned?

[nicknorman]

Thats a shame to the forums loss - followed him since he first joined - enjoyed all his posts, i had offered to help him if he ever needed it on the wolverhampton locks, - what other channel or isnt it allowed to be mentioned?

It's the one that isn't allowed to be mentioned. Or is it now <confused>? He's not posted a lot, last post 13th Oct.

[RLWP]

So, this list that was compiled in a Facebook conversation after I had left it...

 

Richard

[the barnacle]

It's the one that isn't allowed to be mentioned. Or is it now <confused>? He's not posted a lot, last post 13th Oct.

 

Thank you - might have to take a look when i find its magical location

[tree monkey]

 

It depends on where the information being talked about came from

 

 

 

I grew up a very long time a go and learnt the need for confidentiality about information that enters my grey cell about people in business hours and other hours. Just because you know something about someone does not mean you are free to discuss it with all and sundry.

 

Oh just realised you are younger than my eldest.

 

 

So is it possible that the group considered you one of them, the Mods/Admin that is?

Well obviously with age comes a unhealthy paranoia (in my opinion of course) because no personal information was shared in any way shape or form

Simply put you have all jumped on an imaginary high horse, ridden to the top of and imaginary hill and are throwing imaginary conspiracy theories in the air faster than a flat earth society meeting.

Like I say grow up

[Athy]

 

Thats a shame to the forums loss - followed him since he first joined - enjoyed all his posts,

Likewise - I rather envied him his previous boat, except that it seemed to break down with some regularity, and I followed his progress towards professional coal-boating with interest.

[Geo]

 

Thats a shame to the forums loss - followed him since he first joined - enjoyed all his posts, i had offered to help him if he ever needed it on the wolverhampton locks, - what other channel or isnt it allowed to be mentioned?

try the info in the quote below

 

 

 

I'll risk it - Thunderboat?

Richard

 

I'll risk it - Thunderboat?

 

Richard

Well obviously with age comes a unhealthy paranoia (in my opinion of course) because no personal information was shared in any way shape or form

Simply put you have all jumped on an imaginary high horse, ridden to the top of and imaginary hill and are throwing imaginary conspiracy theories in the air faster than a flat earth society meeting.

Like I say grow up

 

I have not jumped to any conclusions just asking questions and the answers are interesting.

Edited October 18, 2016 by Geo

[carlt]

I think we should probably take a step back and ask what it is we are trying to achieve here.

 

If it is to have a slanging match with accusations (true or not), insults (offensive or not) and leading to an acrimonious parting of ways then job done, goals achieved so we can draw a line and slope off or stay depending on our allegiances.

 

If, however, it is to see if we can get back the free flowing, interesting, broad interest discussion forum once was then perhaps it's time to stop the bickering.

 

Personally I couldn't care a jot who spoke to who, what was said and who it was said about.

 

Whatever happened it produced a forum with draconian rules and a moderating team who, frankly, are not up to the job of enforcing those rules.

 

So how do we rewind back from JC2, through the period of hate filled hyperbole and back to the forum CWDF once was?

 

I guess, if I ask the question then I should put up my thoughts and suggestions.

 

First of all I would reinstate the old rules, allow discussion on any subject and enforce those old rules using common sense and diplomacy.

 

Secondly I would sack all the mods with the exception of Lady M, Theo and FTS because of their experience and Patrick because he is a reasonable chap and is too new for me to form an opinion about his mod skills.

 

The other three I am sorry but you may be lovely people but you are not good moderators (perhaps being too lovely is the problem).

 

Folk who can't see the difference between robust debate and the polarised hyperbole we started to see are in no position to moderate a discussion forum.

 

There is a huge difference between, say, myself and Dave Mayall knocking intellectual lumps out of each other and what degenerated into, say, Kippers and Lefties hurling profane abuse at each other.

 

That new mods don't seem to recognise that.

[tree monkey]

try the info in the quote below

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'll risk it - Thunderboat?

 

Richard

 

 

I have not jumped to any conclusions just asking questions and the answers are interesting.

Yes you have lets be honest as far as your concerned theres a grassy knoll and a book repository and the fact is there isnt

 

The problem is with this type of thing is people LOVE to be a victim and adore conspiracy theories.

[Geo]

I think we should probably take a step back and ask what it is we are trying to achieve here.

 

If it is to have a slanging match with accusations (true or not), insults (offensive or not) and leading to an acrimonious parting of ways then job done, goals achieved so we can draw a line and slope off or stay depending on our allegiances.

 

If, however, it is to see if we can get back the free flowing, interesting, broad interest discussion forum once was then perhaps it's time to stop the bickering.

 

Personally I couldn't care a jot who spoke to who, what was said and who it was said about.

 

Whatever happened it produced a forum with draconian rules and a moderating team who, frankly, are not up to the job of enforcing those rules.

 

So how do we rewind back from JC2, through the period of hate filled hyperbole and back to the forum CWDF once was?

 

I guess, if I ask the question then I should put up my thoughts and suggestions.

 

First of all I would reinstate the old rules, allow discussion on any subject and enforce those old rules using common sense and diplomacy.

 

Secondly I would sack all the mods with the exception of Lady M, Theo and FTS because of their experience and Patrick because he is a reasonable chap and is too new for me to form an opinion about his mod skills.

 

The other three I am sorry but you may be lovely people but you are not good moderators (perhaps being too lovely is the problem).

 

Folk who can't see the difference between robust debate and the polarised hyperbole we started to see are in no position to moderate a discussion forum.

 

There is a huge difference between, say, myself and Dave Mayall knocking intellectual lumps out of each other and what degenerated into, say, Kippers and Lefties hurling profane abuse at each other.

 

That new mods don't seem to recognise that.

 

On a broad brush I don't disagree, but my thought is it needs a clean sweep

[Alan de Enfield]

I think we should probably take a step back and ask what it is we are trying to achieve here.

 

If it is to have a slanging match with accusations (true or not), insults (offensive or not) and leading to an acrimonious parting of ways then job done, goals achieved so we can draw a line and slope off or stay depending on our allegiances.

 

If, however, it is to see if we can get back the free flowing, interesting, broad interest discussion forum once was then perhaps it's time to stop the bickering.

 

Personally I couldn't care a jot who spoke to who, what was said and who it was said about.

 

Whatever happened it produced a forum with draconian rules and a moderating team who, frankly, are not up to the job of enforcing those rules.

 

So how do we rewind back from JC2, through the period of hate filled hyperbole and back to the forum CWDF once was?

 

I guess, if I ask the question then I should put up my thoughts and suggestions.

 

First of all I would reinstate the old rules, allow discussion on any subject and enforce those old rules using common sense and diplomacy.

 

Secondly I would sack all the mods with the exception of Lady M, Theo and FTS because of their experience and Patrick because he is a reasonable chap and is too new for me to form an opinion about his mod skills.

 

The other three I am sorry but you may be lovely people but you are not good moderators (perhaps being too lovely is the problem).

 

Folk who can't see the difference between robust debate and the polarised hyperbole we started to see are in no position to moderate a discussion forum.

 

There is a huge difference between, say, myself and Dave Mayall knocking intellectual lumps out of each other and what degenerated into, say, Kippers and Lefties hurling profane abuse at each other.

 

That new mods don't seem to recognise that.

 

Very sensible post and a good potential start to negotiations.

[Naughty Cal]

 

On a broad brush I don't disagree, but my thought is it needs a clean sweep

Which would lose the experienced mods and leave us with a whole new group of inexperienced mods who have it would seem caused this whole upheaval in the first instance.

 

I'm not so sure that is the way forward.

[Geo]

Yes you have lets be honest as far as your concerned theres a grassy knoll and a book repository and the fact is there isnt

 

The problem is with this type of thing is people LOVE to be a victim and adore conspiracy theories.

 

It is interesting how your protestations makes my mind wonder. I have listened to a lot of people over the years and learnt that when all they offer is protestations something is not as it should be.

[tree monkey]

 

It is interesting how your protestations makes my mind wonder. I have listened to a lot of people over the years and learnt that when all they offer is protestations something is not as it should be.

Ask me anything you want but to turn that around a lot of thunderboat are protesting theres a conspiracy, so whos right?

[Geo]

Which would lose the experienced mods and leave us with a whole new group of inexperienced mods who have it would seem caused this whole upheaval in the first instance.

 

I'm not so sure that is the way forward.

 

There is the option to invite back some of the old Mods to help train any new ones. Hopefully under a new system they would be willing to help.

Ask me anything you want but to turn that around a lot of thunderboat are protesting theres a conspiracy, so whos right?

 

I thank you but I am not sure that you have the knowledge that RWLP has. Again thank you for the offer.

[Barry]

I was a member of that conversation. There was no meeting. and no conspiracy. I stayed in that conversation till its natural end.

 

As any group of friends will, when one of them is struggling with stuff and asks for a sounding board, support, etc, things that concern and worry people were discussed.

 

I am not going to reveal who said what in that conversation because it is, in my opinion, entirely between them and it would be very wrong of me to divulge the content or substance of that conversation, or who took part in it. Especially as I do not have their permission to break that confidentiality. I can only speak for myself.

 

It was, more than anything else, a discussion between friends referring to a subject that all of them were very concerned about, namely the severe problems being experienced by CWDF at that time.

 

What I can tell anyone who is interested is that the people involved in that conversation did not draw up a hit list of people to be culled between them. No conspiracy took place. No plan, secret or otherwise, was formed between them.

[tree monkey]

I was a member of that conversation. There was no meeting. and no conspiracy. I stayed in that conversation till its natural end.

 

As any group of friends will, when one of them is struggling with stuff and asks for a sounding board, support, etc, things that concern and worry people were discussed.

 

I am not going to reveal who said what in that conversation because it is, in my opinion, entirely between them and it would be very wrong of me to divulge the content or substance of that conversation, or who took part in it. Especially as I do not have their permission to break that confidentiality. I can only speak for myself.

 

It was, more than anything else, a discussion between friends referring to a subject that all of them were very concerned about, namely the severe problems being experienced by CWDF at that time.

 

What I can tell anyone who is interested is that the people involved in that conversation did not draw up a hit list of people to be culled between them. No conspiracy took place. No plan, secret or otherwise, was formed between them.

Thank you for that

[carlt]

 

It is interesting how your protestations makes my mind wonder. I have listened to a lot of people over the years and learnt that when all they offer is protestations something is not as it should be.

Does it matter?

 

If I stay here then I will be rubbing pixels with people who may or may not have had a conversation on Facebook with friends.

 

The people at the heart of this conspiracy (real or not) are not monsters and neither are those who have left.

 

People talk about stuff on Facebook, people talk about stuff on Thunderboat, people are talking about stuff by PM or in the pub.

 

It happens so let it go and let's talk about new stuff here.